Administrative law, judicial recourse, Council of State, public power prerogatives, Danthony jurisprudence, Ternon jurisprudence, administrative judge, sports federations, public service delegation
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 6
Abstract
This document discusses various aspects of administrative law, including the conditions under which an administrative decision can be withdrawn or repealed, and the jurisdiction of administrative judges.
Extract
[...] could bring the administrative court territorially competent. There is a need to assess the nature of the measure and the significance of its effects on Patrick G.'s situation to determine its character as an internal order measure. As Patrick G.'s acclimatization is difficult, it is undeniable that this measure of incarceration at the Poissy central prison has effects on Patrick G.'s situation. In so far as the decision has the effect of aggravating the conditions of detention of Patrick G., notably through the infringement of his right to private and family life, Patrick G. [...]
[...] Professional Football League and others). The acts taken by a private organization in the exercise of public powers in the context of the execution of the administrative public service are administrative Sect January 1961, Magnier). More specifically, the Council of State holds that, as regards sports federations, 'the appeals brought against the decisions taken by them fall within the jurisdiction of the administrative judge only to the extent that these decisions result from the exercise of a public power prerogative' (CE December 1988, Pascau). [...]
[...] However, six weeks after her appointment, the President of the University pronounces the withdrawal of this appointment on the grounds that the advisory opinion of the Council of Studies and University Life, which was to be obtained, was not obtained. Before which judge can Madame Ambitieuse act? Can the decision to withdraw the nomination be annulled? What are these chances of success? In law, the distinction between acts that create and do not create rights is difficult to establish. However, most individual decisions are creators of rights. These are bearers of prescriptions that have as their addressee one or more persons nominatively designated. [...]
[...] In addition, if a measure cannot cause harm in accordance with the criteria Boussouar, a reversal of the presumption of an internal order measure is considered if the detainee is able to demonstrate an infringement of their fundamental rights and freedoms by the measure. It is undoubtedly the right to lead a private and family life in a normal manner, guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, at article 8. In this case, Patrick G. filed an administrative appeal with the director of the penitentiary administration, which remained unanswered. An implicit decision of rejection was then born within two months following the filing of the appeal. It was only because a decision of refusal was born that Patrick G. [...]
[...] Yet, they are not considered as unilateral administrative acts and cannot be the subject of an annulment appeal. This is because their scope is so weak that they are not considered as causing harm. It is with regard to prisoners that the evolution is the most spectacular. Decisions taken by the prison administration were systematically considered as measures of internal order not subject to appeal January Caillol). In the wake of its ruling Marie Ass February 1995), the Council of State has undertaken to reclassify many of them as unilateral administrative acts with a view to offering legal recourse to the persons concerned by taking into account 'the nature and gravity' of the measure. [...]
